Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!news99.sunet.se!newsfeed.tip.net!cph-2.news.DK.net!dkuug!dknet!cph-1.news.DK.net!dkuug!dknet!icl.icl.dk!sw0198!news.icl.fi!news.eunet.fi!news.funet.fi!news.abo.fi!not-for-mail
From: mandtbac@news.abo.fi (Mats Andtbacka)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux vs FreeBSD
Followup-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Date: 4 Dec 1995 15:55:09 GMT
Organization: Unorganized Usenet Postings UnInc.
Lines: 58
Distribution: comp
Message-ID: <49v5kt$b2@josie.abo.fi>
References: <489kuu$rbo@pelican.cs.ucla.edu> <49o2n2$t4e@daffy.anetsrvcs.uwrf.edu> <49osrd$ptg@times.tfs.com> <49pb5g$di8@agate.berkeley.edu> <49s93l$a6@dyson.iquest.net>
Reply-To: mandtbac@abo.fi
NNTP-Posting-Host: escher.abo.fi
X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950520BETA PL0]
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.advocacy:29057 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:9743 comp.unix.advocacy:11678
John S. Dyson, in <49s93l$a6@dyson.iquest.net>:
[...]
>Please refer to my previous posting as to the instructions. I claim
>that the Linux kernel development is NOT open, but just a tease.
You seem to put very odd qualifications on the word "open".
>Not only is Linux encumbered,
Might I ask by what?
I lived with the idea that "encumbered" in the *BSD world referred to
copyright squabbles such as that with USL; Linux has no equivalent.
Am I mistaken?
> but the CVS tree (if there is one), is NOT available AFAIK.
I'm really not sure what, if any, version control system Linus might
use or feel he needs; but a quick look on ftp.funet.fi should tell you
that every official release since 1.0 _is_ publically available.
That's probably as close as Linux gets to a CVS tree; possibly not so
neat and tidy, but the versions are available.
> When you use Linux, you have to agree to certain
>usage restrictions.
Are you referring to the GPL? If so, your point is moot; *BSD is
copyrighted also. Writing operating systems entirely in the public
domain might not be a useful thing to do.
[...]
>Why don't you just try supping the daily FreeBSD-current tree or perhaps
>randomly ftp down any FreeBSD source file -- you can do it, no problem.
This is definitely a Good Thing. But you don't seem to have a point.
[...]
>If the big Linux suppliers would make their daily source trees available, then
>is the Linux kernel available for daily update???
At the worst of times, that is _exactly_ what it is; people tend to
groan when Linus releases new versions that often, though. And the
"big Linux suppliers" [sic - if only...] would darn well better make
whatever kernel modifications they might code publically available;
the GPL is quite specific on that point.
Granted, user-space programs can and are commercially released for
Linux without source availability. This is another Very Good Thing.
>Linus owns Linux and through his generosity, you can use it -- isn't
>that nice of him?.
With all due respect, this is a gross misunderstanding of what the GPL
does and does not allow for.
--
" ... got to contaminate to alleviate this loneliness
i now know the depths i reach are limitless... "
-- nin